Transseptal versus left atrial approach for mitral valve surgery: postoperative need for pacemaker.

OBJECTIVES

Concerns exist about higher rates of pacemaker implantation using the extended superior transseptal approach for mitral valve surgery. This study aims to compare the extended superior transseptal and the left atrial approach regarding the need for pacemaker implantation after mitral valve surgery.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of the data of patients undergoing mitral valve surgery through either a sternotomy and transseptal approach or a mini-thoracotomy and left atrial approach in a single centre in the period January 2010 to May 2021. The primary outcome was the evaluation of the postoperative pacemaker implantation rate.

RESULTS

Overall, 677 patients were included, 333 with transseptal and 344 with left atrial approach, and 58 (8.6%) patients underwent pacemaker implantation postoperatively. There was no significant difference in the rate of pacemaker implantation between the 2 groups [overall: 34 (10.2%) vs 24 (7%), P = 0.133; for sinus node dysfunction: 12 (3.6%) vs 9 (2.6%), P = 0.459; for high-degree atrioventricular block: 22 (6.6%) vs 15 (4.4%), P = 0.199; transseptal vs left atrial approach, respectively]. A subgroup analysis of the relative effect of transseptal versus left atrial approach on the rate of postoperative pacemaker implantation revealed mitral replacement as a statistically significant confounder (P = 0.019). The exclusion of patients undergoing concomitant cardiac procedures did not lead to a statistically significant difference in the pacemaker implantation rate between the 2 approaches.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis of the data of these patients shows no significant difference in the rate of permanent pacemaker implantation between the extended superior transseptal and the left atrial approach for mitral valve surgery.